[PATCH v8 2/3] drm/panel: Add support for S6E3HA2 panel driver on TM2 board

[Inki Dae]

2017년 02월 01일 06:31에 Thierry Reding 이(가) 쓴 글:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:15:10AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> [ Unknown signature status ]
>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:38:53AM -0500, Sean Paul wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:54:49AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:01:07AM +0900, Inki Dae wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017년 01월 24일 10:50에 Hoegeun Kwon 이(가) 쓴 글:
>>>>>>> Dear Thierry,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you please review this patch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thierry, I think this patch has been reviewed enough but no comment
>>>>>> from you. Seems you are busy. I will pick up this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, but that's not how it works. This patch has gone through 8
>>>>> revisions within 4 weeks, and I tend to ignore patches like that until
>>>>> the dust settles.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seems like the dust was pretty settled. It was posted on 1/11, pinged on 1/24,
>>>> and picked up on 1/31. I don't think it's unreasonable to take it through
>>>> another tree after that.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if drm_panel would benefit from the -misc group maintainership model
>>>> as drm_bridge does. By spreading out the workload, the high-maintenance
>>>> patches would hopefully find someone to shepherd them through.
>>>
>>> Except that nobody except me really cares. If we let people take patches
>>> through separate trees or group-maintained trees they'll likely go in
>>> without too much thought. DRM panel is somewhat different from core DRM
>>> in this regard because its infrastructure is minimal and there's little
>>> outside the panel-simple driver. So we're still at a stage where we need
>>> to fine-tune what drivers should look like and how we can improve.
>>
>> I would love to care and participate in review, but with the structure
>> of your tree you're the only one whose review counts, so I don't
>> participate.
> 
> Really? What exactly do you think is special about the structure of my
> tree? I require patches to be on dri-devel (I pick them up from the
> patchwork instance at freedesktop.org), the tree is publicly available
> and reviewed-by tags get picked up automatically by patchwork.
> 
> The panel tree works exactly like any other maintainer tree. And my
> review is *not* the only one that counts. I appreciate every Reviewed-by
> tag I see on panel patches because it means that I don't have to look as
> closely as I have to otherwise.

I don't think the panel tree works exactly like other maintainer tree.

I'd like to recommend you to read below Greg's blog. This blog says about *Role of a Linux Kernel Maintainer*.
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/maintainer_pledge.html

Especially, I'd like to emphasize below things,
- I will review your patch within 1-2 weeks.
- I will offer semi-constructive criticism of your patches.
- I will let you know the status of your patch if it is rejected, or if it is accepted, what tree it has gone into, where you can find it, and when you can expect to see it merged into Linus's tree.

Why do you ignore contributor's patch? Even though the patch is ugly, I think you need to point it out and give your feedback to contributers as a maintainer.
There was some cases I often missed to review with busy work but I don't ignore contributor's patch.
That was why I tried to pick this patch up to my tree to induce your feedback.

You mentioned like below,
"This patch has gone through 8 revisions within 4 weeks, and I tend to ignore patches like that until the dust settles."

Yes, it's been over a month since contributor sent this patch, and even he requested ping~~~ but there was no comment from you.
You say "I tend to ignore patches like that until the dust settles."

I'd like to say *maintainer is really not a place for power*, and maintainer would implicitly have a role to encourage in contribution activity of contributer.

And you are continuing reply to other maintainer's comments but no comment to the contributor. This guy would still be ping~. :)
You said you've repeatedly complained but how new contributors know this?

And you also said,
"DRM panel is somewhat different from core DRM in this regard because its infrastructure is minimal and there's little outside the panel-simple driver. So we're still at a stage where we need to fine-tune what drivers should look like and how we can improve"

Please, move panel directory to drivers/staging so that other contributors aren't confused. I think drm-panel should be stayed in staging yet until the things you mentioned will be improved because while being discussed and improved, other contributors will continue their contributions.

Thanks,
Inki Dae

> 
> It is true that I am responsible for those patches, that's why I get to
> have the final word on whether or not a patch gets applied. And that's
> no different from any other maintainer tree either.
> 
>> As is, I'm stuck out here with my panel driver I submitted on December
>> 14th completely ignored, and no other developer will look at it because
>> their review doesn't count and only yours does.
> 
> That's the same lame excuse as above. Nobody's keeping you or anyone
> else from reviewing panel patches.
> 
> The truth is that reviewing code is hard and time-consuming, and that's
> why nobody can be bothered to do it. That has nothing whatsoever to do
> with how any specific maintainer operates.
> 
>> I would love for drm-panel to be moved under -misc.
> 
> Like that's going to magically motivate people to spend their time
> reviewing other patches. The only thing that group maintainership adds
> is redundancy.
> 
> Thierry
>